What the Netherlands Got Wrong About Nitrogen and Farmers

According to ABC News “Explainer”:
“The ruling coalition wants to cut emissions of pollutants, predominantly nitrogen oxide and ammonia, by 50% nationwide by 2030. Ministers call the proposal an ‘unavoidable transition’ that aims to improve air, land and water quality.”
It’s not as though the farmers have not been cooperative. Between 1990 and 2015, the consumption of nitrogen fertilizer was reduced by 50% and animal excretion decreased by 40%.
Evidently, this reduction was not sufficient?

Thank you my friend MAJ Dale E. Wilson, Ph.D. for posting the perspective from childrenshealthdefense.org author James Lyons-Weiler, Ph.D.

Background from {[childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/netherlands-nitrogen-emissions-farming/}
What the Netherlands Got Wrong About Nitrogen and Farmers
The Netherlands is “doing it wrong” when it comes to reducing nitrogen emissions. A far better way to meet these goals is to increase farmers' wealth with tax breaks for evidence of restorative and regenerative farming on 10%, then 25%, then 50% of their lands over 15 years.
The globalists have decided to use the power of the Dutch government to enact laws to curb nitrogen oxide and ammonia production by farmers who raise livestock (mostly pigs and cows).
The goal is to cut nitrogen fertilizer use and reduce the amount of protein they feed to their livestock to, according to their documents, enhance biodiversity and reduce risk to human health (see video below).
While this type of farming can produce these types of wastes, the true message is that only about half of farmers will be able to continue farming, and those that survive the nitrogen hatchet will, according to a government statement.
According to ABC News “Explainer”:
“The ruling coalition wants to cut emissions of pollutants, predominantly nitrogen oxide and ammonia, by 50% nationwide by 2030. Ministers call the proposal an ‘unavoidable transition’ that aims to improve air, land and water quality.”
It’s not as though the farmers have not been cooperative. Between 1990 and 2015, the consumption of nitrogen fertilizer was reduced by 50% and animal excretion decreased by 40%.

Evidently, this reduction was not sufficient?
Use carrots, not sticks

The Netherlands is doing it wrong; a far better way to meet these goals is to use a plan to increase farmers’ wealth with tax breaks for evidence of restorative and regenerative farming on 10%, then 25%, then 50% of their lands over 15 years.

They could be paid to sow wildflowers and plant groves of trees that can increase biodiversity. Notably, if farming has impacted biodiversity in the Netherlands, it is by far due to the effects of pesticides and herbicides on insects.
There are many good options to reduce the negative impacts of farming on wildlife, water quality and human health.
Tax incentives or even grants from governments to enhance biodiversity on and around farms, plans to phase out pesticide and herbicide use, and plans like mine to transition an increasing percentage of farmland to permaculture and organic farming will help normalize farming practices that have less negative impacts on the environment and on human health without negatively impacting farmers’ livelihoods.

There is no concept of “beneficence to all parties” in the policies and laws. The claims of increased net benefit by cutting down nitrogen from farming are estimates, not measured data.
This is therefore perceived as intentional harm to farmers, who correctly see unfairness given that other industries are not being asked to curb their nitrogen output. The law includes a plan to reduce speed limits on highways in the Netherlands as cars also emit nitrogen as a nod to the concern over singling out the farming industry.

Farmers around the world are protesting changes in the laws affecting their businesses and threatening their way of life: Canada, of course, Italy, Germany and India.
In the U.S., Bill Gates is buying up farmland.

We can see in the Netherlands an aggressive set of policies and attempts to make them laws that Klaus Schwab approves: He greatly admires Mark Rutte, the first liberal to be appointed Prime Minister in 92 years, as the epitome of a national leader favorable to the World Economic Forum policies.
After World War II, the farmers in the Netherlands were given a mandate to produce food and to keep it plentiful. Land was reclaimed from the sea by dams and fifth-generation farmers are facing economic devastation.
The lack of foresight by Rutte and others who are pushing this through tells me they believe they must do this now before they lose power.
This is a fundamental tenet of idiocracy: Do what is right for the party, not what is right for the people.

Politicians in suits that jet set around to world in their maniacal global forums do more harm than individual farmers; they are the ruling elite who no doubt contribute more than their fair share of the byproducts of civilization.

Scotch eggs are made from pork.
He also travels quite a lot. For public imagery, he rides a bicycle to work. But does he bicycle as he jets around the world? Can’t he just do Zoom calls?

the product of post WW2 kids. they have never been hungry and don't remember what happen in the 30's and 40's. soon the poor will be hungry and the rich won't care where their food comes from. If the rest of the world buys into this, everyone will starve or hungry.